Fix missing types in System.Drawing.Common netframework facade

[ericstj]

Fixes https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/issues/103702

Proposed changes

• Add missing type forwards to System.Drawing.Common .NETFramework assembly.

Customer Impact

• Compiling against netstandard2.0 and running on .NETFramework results in TypeLoadException for a few types in System.Drawing.Common.

Regression?

• No - I don't think this ever worked correctly. Originally the types mentioned here were not exposed to .NETSTandard - only .NETFramework and .NETCore. They were later pushed down into System.Drawing.Common but not exposed in netstandard2.0 because that wasn't being built. Later on when the netstandard2.0 assembly was resurrected for building these types were added, but the forwards were never introduced. Probably it went so long unnoticed because folks don't typically directly reference these types - instead they get them through TypeDescriptor.GetConverter() which would not be impacted by this bug.

Risk

• Very low, just adding type forwards to existing assembly.

  Microsoft Reviewers: Open in CodeFlow

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Project coverage is 74.48470%. Comparing base (346ceee) to head (164c8be). Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## main #11555 +/- ## =================================================== + Coverage 74.42193% 74.48470% +0.06277% =================================================== Files 3039 3039 Lines 628902 629054 +152 Branches 46831 46831 =================================================== + Hits 468041 468549 +508 + Misses 157499 157159 -340 + Partials 3362 3346 -16 ``` | [Flag](https://app.codecov.io/gh/dotnet/winforms/pull/11555/flags?src=pr&el=flags&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=dotnet) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [Debug](https://app.codecov.io/gh/dotnet/winforms/pull/11555/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=dotnet) | `74.48470% <ø> (+0.06277%)` | :arrow_up: | | [integration](https://app.codecov.io/gh/dotnet/winforms/pull/11555/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=dotnet) | `17.97784% <ø> (+0.08296%)` | :arrow_up: | | [production](https://app.codecov.io/gh/dotnet/winforms/pull/11555/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=dotnet) | `47.34926% <ø> (+0.12664%)` | :arrow_up: | | [test](https://app.codecov.io/gh/dotnet/winforms/pull/11555/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=dotnet) | `96.97008% <ø> (-0.00012%)` | :arrow_down: | | [unit](https://app.codecov.io/gh/dotnet/winforms/pull/11555/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=dotnet) | `44.34033% <ø> (+0.04525%)` | :arrow_up: | Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. [Click here](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/carryforward-flags?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=dotnet#carryforward-flags-in-the-pull-request-comment) to find out more.

[ericstj]

cc @lonitra @ViktorHofer

[lonitra]

@ericstj does this need to be backported at all?

[ViktorHofer]

Did you find out why APICompat doesn't flag this? EDIT: Oh lol, it did.

[ericstj]

Did you find out why APICompat doesn't flag this? EDIT: Oh lol, it did.

Yeah, I'm looking at more instances of CP0001 that are suppressed in runtime to see if anywhere else we're ignoring problems like this.

@ericstj does this need to be backported at all?

It could be. It's pretty low risk. The bug exists in both 8.0 and 6.0.